Statistical Analysis. Humor. Knicks.

Menu

Knicks Sign Duhon

According to the Associated Press, the New York Knicks have signed Chris Duhon. It’s thought that Duhon received a 2 year deal worth the full mid level exemption (about $5.8M per year.) The Knicks started out with an offer of about half that much, until the Magic offered Duhon an $11M deal for 3 years. New York then increased its offer in order to sign the former Bulls guard.

Duhon has a good defensive reputation, but on offense he has a limited game. He averaged 6.4 assists per 36 minutes, which combined with his 1.7 turnovers/36 shows him to be good in terms of holding onto the ball and setting his teammates up. However Duhon is a limited scorer (9.3pts/36) who doesn’t get to the free throw line often (1.9fta/36). His shooting percentages aren’t impressive either (.508 ts%, .465 efg%).

Duhon probably chose New York over Orlando not only for the extra cash, but the possibility of starting. Rumors are that the Knicks are likely to buy out Stephon Marbury instead of letting him play out his last season. Marbury wore his welcome out last year (as was reported that the team voted to suspended him for a game) and it’s likely that no matter what Stephon does, he won’t be with the team next year. Knicks’ GM Donnie Walsh has repeatedly said that his aim to get under the cap by 2010, and even if Stephon becomes a model player on the court and a model teammate off the court, the Knicks aren’t likely to resign him for cap purposes.

149 comments on “Knicks Sign Duhon”

…they gave him the WHOLE mle? That’s a pretty unnecessary move, and definitely changes my view of the signing. I was under the impression that it was for just over half the MLE, and was quite content with that. By giving him the full amount, it just sort of makes you wonder if he’s worth it, though it’s not as if the other half would wind up buying a franchise saving player.

The only proper direction for the team is to trade the better half of the roster for Darius Miles, so he and Q-Rich can resume that age old fist-to-the-forehead from their Clippers days. Definitely more sound than any alternative.

Another sound decision by Donnie and Mike. Duhon could turn out to be a real fit fo NYK or become a useful backup in the future, Give the Duke grad a chance to blossom under Coach D! He is not a Steve Nash, but he can play the PG until we get someone better.

Mike K. – Duhon is a better shooter than he showed us last year. He was much better in both of the preceeding seasons.

In 2005-2006:
53.8% TS% 49.3% EFG%

In 2006-2007:
52.9% TS% 49.9% EFG%

He really struggled this year and I think those two seasons are a better indicator of the shooter he really is, solid but not spectacular. Overall I would expect his assists, shot attempts and TS% to all increase under D’Antoni. Even if they don’t, I think its the kind of safe move that we need to make. No more swinging for the fences and striking out.

What matters is the length of the contract and whether or not Duhon can be an effective band-aid while the team retools it’s roster. The answer to both of those is very positive. It’s about transition from Isiah’s Knicks to Donnie’s Knicks – Both Duhon’s contract his basketball ability allown and improve that transition.

I dont know how good this signing is, we all talk about being under the cap for 2010-11 but we all should kiss those Lebron dreams goodbye, there is no way he’s leaving Cleveland look at their cap situation. Back to Duhon he’s nothing special I would really like to see Nate with one full season running the team, if he doesn’t produce, fine draft Scottie Reynolds next season and move Nate and hope someone bites on Randolph, and or Crawford and build our team around Scottie, Danillo and whichever of the Lee, Balkman, Chandler threesome is still on the roster.

“Just spoke with Duhon’s agent, Kevin Bradbury, who says his client will be the starting point guard for the Knicks next season. ‘There’s no guarantees in life, so he’s going to have to come in and earn it,’ Bradbury said. ‘But we’ve been given all the assurances that they’re not bringing him here to sit on the bench.’

Like the move and what it implies…that Stephon has played his last game as a Knickerbocker. Duhon is a pass first PG who just might improve with more pt and D’Antoni as his coach. And the fact that he only got two years makes it a smart move all the way around.

Next up: find a taker for Z-Bo. If Walsh pulls that off, I’ll be pretty damn satisfied with his off-season.

Duhon? whatever. Being Pass First doesn’t mean you’re good. And being pass first doesn’t mean you won’t be called on to shoot. Duhon cant score with seconds remaining on the shot clock, he can’t go on a scoring run by himself. marbury can. Success in this league is defined by if your pg can take over a game. C.Paul. D.Williams. B.Davis- Those are people who’s Marbury’s game is like. These guys will pass, but they can shoot and dominate. Duhon? Not so much. I’ll laugh at you so called knick fans when duhon looks like Charlie Ward out there, thats the reason we went to get Marbury anyway.

Another sound decision by Donnie and Mike. Duhon could turn out to be a real fit fo NYK or become a useful backup in the future, Give the Duke grad a chance to blossom under Coach D! He is not a Steve Nash, but he can play the PG until we get someone better.

We have a PG on the Team. Marbury go look at his career stats, you guys nitpick over duhon, go look at Marbury’s career stats- borderline HallofFame (ask Dime Magazine)
How come no one has said, Marbury will have an All Star year and we’ll pick him up next year at a premium? I haven’t read that ANYWHERE. how come?

We have a PG on the Team. Marbury go look at his career stats, you guys nitpick over duhon, go look at Marbury’s career stats- borderline HallofFame (ask Dime Magazine)
How come no one has said, Marbury will have an All Star year and we’ll pick him up next year at a premium? I haven’t read that ANYWHERE. how come?

“Please convince me this is different, since it doesnt seem to address our most urgent needs.”

1. It’s a 2 year deal, not a 5 year deal.
2. The only “need” most posters have talked about all offseason is a “pass-first” PG. I’m not one of those posters; I’d say the only “need” is to build a good team and Duhon seems like a positive step in that direction. Duhon at least fills more of a need that Jared Jeffries did the same offseason Balkman was drafted or Jerome James did the same offseason Frye was drafted and Curry was acquired.
3. Defense doesn’t seem to be the priority, but Duhon is instantly the Knicks’ best defensive guard.

Offering him 2 years almost 12 mill if the next best offer was 3 years 11 million is very odd, but maybe Orlando upped the ante.

“The next player I want us to try and sign is Ramon Sessions.”

Could be someone to think about next offseason depending on how he plays next season (both if he’s actually good and if he’s so good that he’s a hot commodity). Although, if he’s high on our (the fans’) list next offseason it likely means Duhon was a bust.

“Next up: find a taker for Z-Bo. If Walsh pulls that off, I’ll be pretty damn satisfied with his off-season.”

Amen. If Walsh finds a reasonable deal for Z-Bo I’d call the offseason a success even if Danilo resigns with Milan and Duhon never gets off the bench. A PF with a slightly higher career TS% and eFG% than Jamal Crawford? I don’t see an offense working with him in it no matter how many shots he “creates” (I mean that’s the whole problem: “creating” too many fade away mid-range Js with a hand in his face).

Next up: find a taker for Z-Bo. If Walsh pulls that off, I’ll be pretty damn satisfied with his off-season.

That would be an unbelievable offseason. I think moving Z-Bo is going to take more time. I think another team will eventually trade for him, but maybe not until the season starts. Once the season is going there’ll be some team that needs a scoring punch, and Zach Randolph will look attractive at that point.

I guess in trading terms, the offseason is like waiting outside in line at a night club, where everyone’s standards are way higher. However the trading deadline is more like last call, when the standards are way lower.

“I’ll laugh at you so called knick fans when duhon looks like Charlie Ward out there”

I’m laughing because Charlie Ward had 72 career playoff games vs. Marbury’s 18. Duhon’s already been in 21 after 4 years in the league. It’s not the playground, it’s about winning as a team.
Marbury has never shown that he is capable of doing so, Duhon and Ward both have. They’re not nearly as talented as Marbury, but they know the game and do/did what their team needs/needed to win. (There’s also no promise–to paraphrase Duhon’s agent–that Duhon’s the starter, he’s just got a good chance to earn minutes/ the starting job.)

“How come no one has said, Marbury will have an All Star year and we’ll pick him up next year at a premium? I haven’t read that ANYWHERE. how come?”

Marbury was last an All-Star in 02-03 (although he had a better season in 04-05) and has noticeably lost a step since then. He’s a guy, like Steve Francis and unlike Kidd or Nash, who is unlikely to age gracefully because his primary weapon was athleticism. He’s capable of putting up good numbers next season, but I think it’s a stretch to believe he’s capable of an “All-Star” season at this point (I mean maybe motivation’s been his only problem, but I wouldn’t bet on it as Knicks’ management and even motivated he’s motivated to play the losing brand of basketball he knows not to relearn the game).

He’s played a certain style his whole career–dominating the ball, running a lot of pick and roll, losing–and been unwilling and/or unable to embrace change/a complex, coherent offensive system. Having coached Marbury for a few games with the Suns I think D’Antoni is in a much better position to judge Marbury’s personality then myself. I’m fine if he and Walsh decide to cut, sit, trade Marbury, but I could also see him being a somewhat useful player if he brings the right attitude.

At this point, I’d say Marbury is best suited for a supporting/bench role, and could even be a 6th man of the year candidate as such (if Manu’s starting). He’s not likely to go for that having been the Knicks’ “franchise player,” but in Boston, LA (Lakers), San Antonio, etc. he might accept a smaller role and be a great fit.

“I guess in trading terms, the offseason is like waiting outside in line at a night club, where everyone’s standards are way higher. However the trading deadline is more like last call, when the standards are way lower.”

Good analogy, even later in the offseason standards get lower once teams lose out on their first option free agents.

I’m laughing because Charlie Ward had 72 career playoff games vs. Marbury’s 18. Duhon’s already been in 21 after 4 years in the league. It’s not the playground, it’s about winning as a team.
Marbury has never shown that he is capable of doing so, Duhon and Ward both have. They’re not nearly as talented as Marbury, but they know the game and do/did what their team needs/needed to win. (There’s also no promise–to paraphrase Duhon’s agent–that Duhon’s the starter, he’s just got a good chance to earn minutes/ the starting job.)
“How come no one has said, Marbury will have an All Star year and we’ll pick him up next year at a premium? I haven’t read that ANYWHERE. how come?”
Marbury was last an All-Star in 02-03 (although he had a better season in 04-05) and has noticeably lost a step since then. He’s a guy, like Steve Francis and unlike Kidd or Nash, who is unlikely to age gracefully because his primary weapon was athleticism. He’s capable of putting up good numbers next season, but I think it’s a stretch to believe he’s capable of an “All-Star” season at this point (I mean maybe motivation’s been his only problem, but I wouldn’t bet on it as Knicks’ management and even motivated he’s motivated to play the losing brand of basketball he knows not to relearn the game).
He’s played a certain style his whole career–dominating the ball, running a lot of pick and roll, losing–and been unwilling and/or unable to embrace change/a complex, coherent offensive system. Having coached Marbury for a few games with the Suns I think D’Antoni is in a much better position to judge Marbury’s personality then myself. I’m fine if he and Walsh decide to cut, sit, trade Marbury, but I could also see him being a somewhat useful player if he brings the right attitude.
At this point, I’d say Marbury is best suited for a supporting/bench role, and could even be a 6th man of the year candidate as such (if Manu’s starting). He’s not likely to go for that having been the Knicks’ “franchise player,” but in Boston, LA (Lakers), San Antonio, etc. he might accept a smaller role and be a great fit.

I hope ypu are not intimating that if we had Duhon or Ward instead of Marbury the past 4 years we would have been a playoff team.

I agree with the poster that said if you have Duhon, Lee and Balkman on the floor, the other 2 need to be offensive studs or you are going to have trouble scoring except in transition. We would be relying heavily on any 2 of Jamal, Nate, Gallinari, Zach and Curry to carry the offense.

Unless he improves (which he might) Duhon is best suited to be a 20-25 minute player. If Steph is still on the team (I hope he is until he blows this last chance) he is so much better than Duhon it would be unfortunate if he isn’t given that chance. At the top of his game he is still a top-10 PG in this league.

I am not a bigh Steph fan, but he was coming off a year when he had a injury serious enough to require surgery, a mother and father figure dying, a sex scandal, an weird benching, and a management/coaching debacle, and is in a contract year. If he contributes to 10 extra wins this year, everyone, including Eddy, Jamal and Zach, looks better and becomes more tradable. If you dump him just for the sake of being rid of him, and Duhon can’t handle the starting role, then where do you go? Back to Jamal playing the point part time?

As for the comment that before the draft, most of the posters were saying that our most pressing need was a pass-first PG, I think that was misinterpreted. I think people were talking more on the lines of hoping to get a Chris Paul-Deron Williams-Steve Nash type, pure PG who score but who also made others better being available to us that high in the draft. We have so many pressing needs that a great PG could mask some of those problems. Duhon is not a great PG and his lack of an offensive game might actually make those needs more glaring at times.

“Even before signing Duhon, the Knicks had resolved that they could not move forward while Marbury was still in the locker room. In their brief time with the franchise, Walsh and D’Antoni have learned how incredibly unpopular Marbury is with his teammates.”

“D’Antoni has told friends that the Knicks are much better than their 23-59 record last season indicated and that team chemistry was the greatest problem. Cutting ties with Marbury is viewed as a critical first step in changing a losing culture.”

“As for the comment that before the draft, most of the posters were saying that our most pressing need was a pass-first PG, I think that was misinterpreted. I think people were talking more on the lines of hoping to get a Chris Paul-Deron Williams-Steve Nash type, pure PG who score but who also made others better being available to us that high in the draft.”

Misinterpreted? At what point was getting a “great” PG, such as Paul, Williams, or Nash, even an actual possibility?

Also, as has been mentioned previously on a thread, many Bulls players thought Duhon should have been their starter, except Skiles hated him. To state that Duhon is strictly a 20-25 minute player seems premature. We need to see what he can do with a coach who doesn’t hate him.

Best part of the Duhon signing is I believe it should basically squash the idea of Lee for Felton. To complain about a two year deal at this point would be crazy. Personally I liked the idea of taking a flyer on Livingston/Telfair but this was by far the safest route and likely the best move. I’m not huge on Duhon, I believe he is a very limited player..but I’m willing to allow Walsh and D’Antoni a chance to figure this all out. Unlike with Isiah I believe Walsh has a vision and a direction and I’m not going to jump on him for signing a guy to a two year deal.

To clarify, I don’t think any of the guards taken after Rose could ever be one of those PGs.

I think that Mayo and Westbrook are going to surprise lots of people and become stars and excellent passers, but we can agree to disagree there. My guess is that the knicks would have gone for either of those 2 before piking Gallinari, but who knows? Bayless, Gordon and Augustin were also in the mix if we traded down, but are less likely to become stars; I would take any of those guys over Duhon, though. All of these guys have potential to be very good PGs.

Duhon was drafted in the 2nd round and couldn’t beat out Heinrich for a starting job. If Skiles (a former pass-first PG) hated Duhon, that worries me, since he hated Eddy Curry and turned out to be right.

The Knicks have two goals:get under the cap ASAP and their goal is 2010,terrific;build a core team;Marbury is insignificant,he fits neither criteria unless they can move him for value,Duhon might be a piece,but not likely a core player.Golden State may provide an opportunity to speed-up the cap situation.They need to replace Davis’ 20+pts-Crawford,who’s addition might also pacify Ellis.Throw in Curry,as GS’ price of admission,who actually works well offensively with Craw and who’s lack of defense might not even be noticed by Nelson. Nelson’s situation adds to this trade possiblity as he’s at the end of his run.In return the K’s get Harrington,Perovic,Wright and Belinelli, all with 1 years except Per,who’s a 2!GS is giving up beaucoup youth but none of these may contribute for the remainder of Nelson’s regime. The #’s work for both teams.Adding Steph and Rose’s contracts the K’s are under the cap next year. Now select your core-Gallinari, Chandler,Lee??

I like the signing. I am not worried about the money issue, the 2 factors that are key are length of contract and culture change. We have him for 2 years, perfect time to test him out and see what he has without locking up money for the upcoming free agents. Second, and more importanly, the culture had to change. The leader on the floor is the point guard and as one source said, both Walsh and d’antoni realize how unpopular STARBURY is. This was crippling the teams on the court play bc no one wanted to play with this guy. With Duhon you have a floor general that can spread the floor, play some defense and distribute the ball. Thats exactly what a point guard should do. Not what STARBURY did which held the ball for 20 seconds.

Everyone is so down on StepH, but when you take a good look all of the free agents we are trying to bring in to replace him none aren’t close to or better then him including Duhon. I agree that Marbury has worn out his welcome in New York, but he is not the blame for the Knicks. It was the management:(Isiah, Dolan)You can not build a franchise around Eddy Curry, he has to many flaews in his game…terrible passer out of the double team, terrible fould shooter, doesn’t rebound just to name a few. When you brought Steph in you were suppose to surround him with athletes and shooters..you don’t go out and get another ballhandler like crawford..you get someone like mike miller or raja bell..a spot up shooter. Stehp has always been on subar teams.So all the Knick fans that hate his guts right now trust me you will be saying we should have given him a chance when he is on another team producing. For example Chauncey Billiups had a terrible 5 seasons in the leaugue, all of a sudden you surround him with players that compliments his game with a great system he wins and becomes an All Star. As a former player i can say that you don’t just lose your ability over night. Marbury has alot of game left in him, and we are going to see that if not in a Knick uniform then somewhere else.

More and more I think next years off season will be a much better opportunity to clean house and move all of our bad contracts. I think most would agree that D’Antoni will make these bums look better this season than they did last season under Isiah. That should make them a little more appealing to other teams and hopefully easier to move. I just can’t imagine the trade value for these guys being any lower than it is right now. We have one throw away season coming up where we can try to make our ‘junk’ look as nice as possible in an attempt to move it.
Also, I hope Walsh and D’Antoni don’t pin their futures on signing LeBron since it looks like a longshot. Either way getting under the cap and showing some constraint when signing contracts will help the franchise. One day we’ll be back on top.

Charlie Ward was successful because of others players, of course, but that’s exactly the situation here, only the “other players” aren’t here yet. What I mean is that Duhon allows the Knicks to have some stability at a position that is more or less unoccupied at present (go away, Starbury), but his presence does not preclude any further moves. If when we finally get a bona fide superstar that player turns out to be a PG, Duhon sits and his contract is no problem. But it is more likely that the action in trades and signings for the next two years will at other positions.

I am happy to see a little patience and realism from management. The candy store signings drove me crazy.

By the way, Zach and Marbury mutually confirm the problem of “talent” as the only consideration for signing a player. Yes, both players seem to offer us the best chance to score on any given possession. But, by now, it seems beyond obvious that the Knicks are a better team when neither player wears the orange and blue.

Re: Steph being unpopular with teammates, I don’t know how true this reallyis, or who he is unpopular with. If it’s Q-Poor, Eddy Curry, Zach Randolph or Eddy, who cares? None of those guys are model teammates. If it’s Lee or Jamal, 2 guys who gave their all every night, I’d be more concerned; it seemed that Lee and Steph actualy had pretty good chemistry when on the court together, as did Steph and Jamal.

Remember, after Isiah was free of Steph, the team didn’t exactly come together, and anyone who uses the fact that Isiah played Steph after that so-called team vote as an excuse for mailing in games thereafter has no credibility to begin with.

Well, given Kikuchiyo’s assertion that Duhon is the second coming of Chuck Ward, I suppose what we’ve got to look forward to is 3 or 4 years of mediocre, but coherent point play, followed by a few more putrid years during which he makes everyone forget how nearly decent he was for a few years, and also manages to piss off a large segment of fans, with disparaging comments (Ward’s comments about Jews in the early 00’s).

Well, given Kikuchiyo’s assertion that Duhon is the second coming of Chuck Ward, I suppose what we’ve got to look forward to is 3 or 4 years of mediocre, but coherent point play, followed by a few more putrid years during which he makes everyone forget how nearly decent he was for a few years, and also manages to piss off a large segment of fans, with disparaging comments (Ward’s comments about Jews in the early 00’s).
Way to lay out a golden future, Kikuchiyo, really…

Given that he only got a two-year contract, that scenario seems mighty unlikely.

Bottom line on Steph is he has worn out his welcome everywhere he has ever been. Why is that? Because he’s a me-first player? Because he’s a poor teammate? Maybe so. More likely, it’s simply because he’s a dumbass. A PG is supposed to provide floor leadership, settle things down when runs happen, ensure a good trip when you need it most. When your PG is a flat out dumbass, it’s very hard for him to do any of those things.

Thus the story of Steph’s career is: If we need a bucket real bad, I’ll go get it myself. Problem with that is he no longer has the first step to pull it off, and he’s never been all that great a shooter. Couple that with the fact he only knows how to do one thing (screen roll), that he couldn’t guard a grandmother with bad knees, and that he is a legend in his own mind, and you immediately realize his salary is at least triple his actual value on the court.

I’ll give anyone 3 to 1 Steph never plays in another all-star game no matter where he goes. His “glory days” (such as they were) are all well behind him.

Count Zero, that was more or less my go at being a snarky pain in the ass. Whenever Charlie Ward is brought up, that instinct is just automatically triggered. I do in fact see the Duhon signing as a sensible one, given the brevity of the deal, and the fact that he does not seem like the sort of player to cause much ill will or stir up any chaos. Perfect for guiding the team through the two years of mediocrity before the supposed light at the end of the tunnel in 2010.

I’m stunned that anyone is defending Marbury at this point. The guy has been nothing but cancer over the past two seasons. He isn’t a part of the Knicks’ long term plans. His disinterested attitude and declining skills don’t make the Knicks better in the short term. I’d rather just kick the guy to the curb already. Do you really think he makes the Knicks better as starter than Duhon would? How much better? He’s taking us to the playoffs? Is that even the best case scenario?

Like the Duhon signing. Low risk. Young player who has done well with limited minutes. Doesn’t need to be the primary option on offense.

Starbury is just not the answer. Neither is Duhon. So…where do we go from here? We have a glut at the PG. ( Marbury,Nate,Duhon) Something is due to happen soon. I definitely dont think Duhon is a starter. Can we move Z-Bo? Only time will tell…someone gotta to take that guy off our hands to D Lee can get his proper minutes. Its going to be an odd season and i really dont want to watch the same team playing all winter. I look forward to seeing Danillo playing but what else is there to look forward to. I guess ill be watching a good mix of NEts and Knicks games this season because the Nets will be exciting to watch.

Tastycakes,
In my mind there is no doubt that Steph means more wins than no Steph for this current team. If it is 1 or 2 wins, I can agree with you, although I would still rather get something for his expiring contract. If it is 10 or more wins, then it would be bad business to let him go for nothing.

I don’t know whether his skills are actually declining. Funny, when Lee showed minimal, if any development in his third season, his fans on this site were quick to bring up the possible effects of a lingering injury from last years. Steph needed surgery and it was said by his surgeon remarked afterwards that there were a lot of issues with his ankle but he should make a full recovery. He’s only 31 and it remains to be seen whether he has slowed down or not. Since there really is nothing to lose by keeping him until the trading deadline, why not see what he has and give him an opportunity to play in the D’Antoni system?

Unless Gallinari is a stud from day 1, I think Marbury can mean more wins than you think. Would you concede that if it is 10 or more that yuo would let him play out his contract?

I will say again that before Marbury hurt his shoulder in 06-07 he and the team were playing excellent ball. He was not only playing injured last season, he was playing for a terrible coach who alienated everyone on the team by mid-season. Larry Brown had his mind made up about Steph before he got there.

THERE IS NO LONG-TERM RISK OF KEEPING STEPH ON THE TEAM UNTIL FEBRUARY, OR UNTIL HE SHOWS HE IS A NEGATIVE UNDER THE NEW SYSTEM.

So think about it this way, Burger King James has made 16.2 million in three seasons with the knicks. In that time he has averaged 29 games per season, 2.49 points per game, 1.83 rebounds, 2.08 fouls per game, 0.43 blocks, 0.17 assists, and 7.8 minutes per game. Or…
$23,684 per minute
$186,206 per game
$746,543 per point
$101,250 per rebound
2,879 trips to the drive thru over three years. Before taxes.

Jared Jay-free has been paid 10,847,200 in two seasons. He has been paid $ 84,743 per game, $ 22,047 per point, and $22,551 per rebound.

If Duhon just supplies his career average for minutes, points, and assists, he will be a bargain compared to those two. And dont get me started on what Q and Curry did last year…

Steph has hardly ever won in his career, and whenever he’s been replaced his former team has been instantly better… what gives you the impression he’s worth 10 wins??????

Try reading my posts before jumping to conclusions about what I’m saying. Marbury has played one style of basketball throughout his career: dominated the ball, pick and rolled, and lost. The Knicks don’t want to play this way. Steph doesn’t know any other way to play. Steph is, therefore, not a good PG for the Knicks. Doesn’t matter what happened for the last 4 years… the team’s moving forward.

Where did I say that that D’Antoni had to play a style suited to Steph or any other player? I merely said give him a brief opportunity to fit into the system. By buying him out, you get nothing in return; by holding on to him, you can possibly package his expiring contract in a trade come February (his prorated salary would be less burdensome for another team to take on, I believe).

Now that I’ve read it twice, I still disagree with your argument that he can only play one style, or for that matter, even one position. Right now, if healthy, he’s probably already as good as Jamal at the 2, which granted isn’t saying much.

I think too much is being made of him being a “loser” or a “cancer” and that the “get rid of him now at all cost” mentality can cost us both wins in the short term and assets in the long term.

If this wasn’t a contract year where Steph had a lot to gain from fitting in and being compliant, I wouldn’t be making these arguments.

This is a good move, we didnt overpay, lol we are already over the cap, the idea is length not dollars, 2 yr deal is great the amount is irrelevent, its New York people.
Fact is we need someone whos a pass 1st player, Nate while hes getting better, is a better shooter than creator. Marbury isnt a leader and Crawford’s a SG with handle, not a true PG.

Over the past 11 seasons, when has Marbury ever been worth 10 wins? When has he ever played in any system besides the dominating the ball, pick-and-roll, whatever Steph wants to do style successfully?

In both cases the answer is never. Could it happen, sure, but after 11 seasons I wouldn’t bet the franchise on it. If nothing else Duhon is a solid back-up plan behind an unpredictable, hard to please PG who’s never bothered to learn the game.

“Right now, if healthy, he’s probably already as good as Jamal at the 2, which granted isn’t saying much.”

Again, I said I think that Steph can be a useful player if he’s not given 40 mpg to dominate the ball. I just don’t see it as very likely that he changes his ways playing for the franchise that’s bent over backwards for him every step of the way and has zero identity at this point.

As far as being an asset, I agree that it would be better to trade him–say for to Cleveland for other expiring contracts and a future first rounder–but after all the news about the Knicks wanting to cut him I don’t think any team will bite, figuring they can pick him up for the vet’s minimum as a free agent in a few weeks. We’ll have to see what Walsh’s plan is, but as I’ve said 3 or 4 times now I don’t much care if Steph’s cut/traded/bought out or gets the chance to redeem himself.

…you can possibly package his expiring contract in a trade come February…

Even on the slight chance Marbury can turn it around (and he would have to do so on sooo many fronts: play a different type of offense, come back from injury & aging, become a model teammate, accept a lesser role/minutes, play better defense) what’s the purpose? Anything gained from this wouldn’t help the Knicks in the long term. Re-signing Marbury isn’t in the long term plan (it would kill our cap). And any trade would require the team to accept contracts of equal amount. And even if you traded for contracts/late 1st as was mentioned above, those contracts would all have to expire for it to be worth it. What are the odds that all of the above would come to fruition?

Considering the harm Marbury could do (eat up minutes, play selfishly, cause a rift among teammates, undermine the coach’s respectability, make a bigger mockery of the franchise, alienate fans, etc.) it hardly seems worth it.

Again I don’t see what’s to gain here. In the absolute best case dream scenario a late first round pick. But most likely nothing or worse.

I also see no downside to at least keeping his contract on the books. If you really don’t want him around the team, just tell him to stay home. But why not keep his contract around for trade bait later in the year? There’s always an owner that wants to save $$ and might trade a contract that ends a year later (ie. after 2010 season) in order to get that contract off the books purely from a business perspective.

I also don’t see why Steph can’t play at the 2 with Jamal coming off the bench. Steph ended up guarding 2s a lot of the time anyway, and he certainly couldn’t be worse than Jamal as a defender even if he’s smaller. A 4 guard rotation with Steph, Nate, Jamal, and Duhon wouldn’t be the worst 4 guard rotation out there. Then you rotate Curry, Lee, Randolph, Balkman, and Chandler, throw some minutes to the kid Gallinari. And if it doesn’t work out, then you can buy him out or trade him for peanuts. It’s not like we have much young talent to develop in the backcourt (ie. like we do with Lee, Balkman, and Chandler in the frontcourt) so giving Steph minutes doesn’t bother me.

Admittedly, part of me still has some sympathy for Marbury — he’s been a Knick fan his whole life, never wanted to do anything but play for his team, and now he’s a pariah. Very tragic. I almost feel like after the toxic relationships he had with LB and Isiah, maybe a new coach might help him change his game for the better.

“I don’t see what’s to gain here. In the absolute best case dream scenario a late first round pick. But most likely nothing or worse.”

KB– Caleb, in his free agent round up, alluded to the possibility of a team like the Rockets looking to move Yao or TMac at the deadline. It seems every year there is a high-profile star making trade demands. Marbury’s expiring contract has more value than just a late first round pick because of the money it could potentially save a team. The Lakers had no use for the underperforming Kwame Brown last summer, but they didn’t buy him out. They turned him into a cornerstone on a Western Conference champion team.

I suppose that if you have no interest in turning Marbury into another max contract player, then buying out Marbury would be a reasonable rebuilding step. It certainly wouldn’t hurt the team long term. But it seems that his potential value in February is being dismissed because of his need for improvement, which there is much room for, but it doesn’t in anyway diminish the fact that he is a $22 million expiring contract.

Just to expand on what Z and I are talking about, imagine the following trade, which is not ridiculous in my mind:

Sacramento, for instance, realizes their team right now has very little chance of competing. Let’s say it’s mid-season next year and they are looking like a serious lottery team. They want to make a big splash in free agency after next season to go with Kevin Martin and all. But they are saddled with contracts that end after the 2009-2010 season like Shareef, Brad Miller, and Kenny Thomas (otherwise known as ~$25M due in 2009-2010 for 3 guys that have no business being on a rebuilding team). And perhaps the Maloofs would like to save that $25M or use that money for actually good players. Would it be so ridiculous to trade them Marbury for those 3 and perhaps a lottery unprotected 1st and couple of 2nd rounders? And then during the following season you are armed with 3 more huge expiring contracts that could be used in other trades.

Of course this is all Dolan’s money that would be paid out — I of course don’t care about his money.

Frank – those three contracts wouldn’t do you any good though, since you want them to expire. So yes if someone were desperate to get under the cap this year, you lose a draft pick (un-protected no way) by not having Marbury on the books. I guess in that scenario keeping Marbury would be useful, but I don’t see that as being a likely situation (albeit possible).

I would probably be happy with the team sending Marbury home knowing there was 0 chance he’d play with the team. But the Knicks tried that with Steve Francis – and brought him back when they were hit by injury. I’m not sure I’d want that.

However it’s possible that Walsh/D’Antoni are strong enough to abide by their decision, where Isiah Thomas clearly wasn’t. And I could see them keeping Marbury on the books & just sending him home for the season unless a deal like the one you mentioned came up. One thing we should be wary – only the NY media is reporting that the Knicks will buy out Marbury. They’ve been wrong so often, that it may not even be in the minds of the Knick front office.

Just to expand on what Z and I are talking about, imagine the following trade, which is not ridiculous in my mind:
Sacramento, for instance, realizes their team right now has very little chance of competing. Let’s say it’s mid-season next year and they are looking like a serious lottery team. They want to make a big splash in free agency after next season to go with Kevin Martin and all. But they are saddled with contracts that end after the 2009-2010 season like Shareef, Brad Miller, and Kenny Thomas (otherwise known as ~$25M due in 2009-2010 for 3 guys that have no business being on a rebuilding team). And perhaps the Maloofs would like to save that $25M or use that money for actually good players. Would it be so ridiculous to trade them Marbury for those 3 and perhaps a lottery unprotected 1st and couple of 2nd rounders? And then during the following season you are armed with 3 more huge expiring contracts that could be used in other trades.
Of course this is all Dolan’s money that would be paid out — I of course don’t care about his money.

I get this logic and can see some sense in it but…assuming a scenario like this falls into our lap (which is a big assumption) I now have three more players I don’t want. I then have to hold on to them and wait for the opp to trade their expirings in ’10-’11 — which means I’m tying up three roster spots with guys I have no intention of using on the court, and who will likely be unhappy about the fact that they’re not getting any minutes. (Remember that D’Antoni is not a “play 10 guys” kind of coach.) Or, I can cut/buyout one or more of them…which is no different than doing the same with Marbury now except I have delayed the inevitable.

I just don’t see any scenario in which Stephon’s expiring contract brings me back something I actually want. As you yourself said, Shareef, Miller and Kenny Thomas have no business being on a rebuilding team — well, we ARE a rebuilding team. What the hell do we want with them? It seems like you are advocating trading expiring contracts to get more expiring contracts — which you can then trade for what? More expiring contracts? I admit it does make a certain amount of sense in a weird sort of way…but not enough sense for me to actually get behind it.

Frank – those three contracts wouldn’t do you any good though, since you want them to expire. So yes if someone were desperate to get under the cap this year, you lose a draft pick (un-protected no way) by not having Marbury on the books. I guess in that scenario keeping Marbury would be useful, but I don’t see that as being a likely situation (albeit possible).
I would probably be happy with the team sending Marbury home knowing there was 0 chance he’d play with the team. But the Knicks tried that with Steve Francis – and brought him back when they were hit by injury. I’m not sure I’d want that.
However it’s possible that Walsh/D’Antoni are strong enough to abide by their decision, where Isiah Thomas clearly wasn’t. And I could see them keeping Marbury on the books & just sending him home for the season unless a deal like the one you mentioned came up. One thing we should be wary – only the NY media is reporting that the Knicks will buy out Marbury. They’ve been wrong so often, that it may not even be in the minds of the Knick front office.

I meant that Sac-town gives US a 1st round pick, not the other way around. And you’re not trading expiring contracts for later expiring contracts — you’re trading expiring contracts for later expiring contracts AND an unprotected 1st round pick.

And teams can be desperate to get under the cap for basketball reasons, but also to get under the cap and luxury tax just for money reasons (see: Phoenix Suns and other teams that are just trading away stuff just to save money). Maybe Donald Sterling wants to save himself $20M if his Baron Davis experiment goes poorly. These guys are super-rich but $20-25M is nothing to sneeze at. Especially in this crappy economy, the deep Dolan pockets might be useful. Atlanta would potentially be a good trade partner — their ownership situation is a mess.

keeping marbury is still an option. D’antoni has already been on record as saying that he sees Marbury as a 2. Maybe he does stay or maybe we can be traded. But i dont think its a slam dunk the knicks just want to eat that 22mil and get nothing for it, if marbury plays nice he can have value during the deadline with his talent and expiring contract. Or he can continue to be a malcontent and get put on waivers at basically any point of the yr, we’d just be doing other teams a favor cutting him now.

Sorry for being such an ass last night: I was drinking and in a foul mood.

I’m not really strongly against having Marbury on the team (probably could have fooled you), just presenting the argument for why he shouldn’t be. Walsh has tons of experience running a team (and dealing with “character issue” guys) and D’Antoni’s coached Steph before, plus they’ve both actually met Steph and the other Knicks, and know a whole lot more about basketball than I do… so I’m comfortable with whatever they decide.

“Duhon is not a great PG and his lack of an offensive game might actually make those needs more glaring at times.”

Duhon’s definitely not a GREAT PG, and not really even great at any one thing. Sure I would have rather gotten Chris Paul, but (short of trying an Augustin/ Bayless in the draft or hoping a Telfair/ Livingston has for some reason been hiding his real game) there wasn’t much chance of that.
Given their situation and what they had to work with, I agree with Dave’s logic that this is the sort of low-risk, solid signing the Knicks needed. Duhon’s been pretty consistent and reliable over his career and brought a solid all-around game that’s helped his team win. Between Dooling, Arroyo, and the other PGs on the market for the MLE I don’t think anyone brings the combination of outside shooting, passing, running a team, and defense that Duhon does. Even on the trade market–where of course you’re going to have to give something up–I don’t know if anyone had that combo… maybe a Lowry, Crittendon, etc. can develop it and even develop into a better player than Duhon but there’s no maybe with Duhon and he cost the Knicks no asset besides the MLE.
I do hope Duhon takes at least a small step forward and has a career year for D’Antoni: nothing spectacular, just a slight improvement on his 05-06 when WoW loved his season and he posted his highest PER (only 12.9) as well. Of course there’s a small chance he could take a large step forward: Nash had comparable ast-rates, PERs, even worse TO-rate, and only 1 season where he had significantly more pts/36 his first 4 seasons in the league, so here’s hoping! Kidding, but if he can be a very poorman’s Nash it should do.

I’m really not too worried about scoring. The Knicks have plenty of guys who can put points on the board, one of their biggest problems has been that some of their high volume “scorers” are remarkably inefficient. D’Antoni is either going to have to turn Randolph and Crawford into efficient scorers or cut down their FGAs significantly (by sitting them or changing their roles, assuming they’re not traded). I’m not holding my breath that Randolph and Crawford turn it around, so why not concentrate on getting the ball to the Knicks’ most efficient scorers: Curry and Lee?
-Curry might also have to make some adjustments to get quicker shots, but he’s already so devastatingly efficient that I think it’s a better bet than Randolph/Crawford.
-Lee efficiently scored 13.4 pts/36 last season. In a presumably faster paced D’Antoni system which should take better advantage of his movement without the ball and (hopefully) feature him a tiny bit more, he might be able to up that by 2 pts/36 to 15.4 or around Joe Johnson’s pts/36 in 04-05 (Johnson has a much different game but was also a 4th year player that season, the culmination of a progression in pts/36 from 10.9 to 12.8 to 14.8 to 15.6).
-Between Danilo, Chandler, and Q, D’Antoni should find two wings capable of putting up 15+ pts/36 and hitting from the outside.
-GIven that Crawford’s been the Knicks’ “leader” and every coach he’s had in NY has loved him he’s pretty likely to get a sizable role in the backcourt, I just hope he responds the way he did to Larry Brown and posts numbers slightly better than his 15.9 pts/36 on .544 TS% under LB.
-Nate should be good for 17.5 pts/36 (his 07-08 total) off the bench but hopefully at his 06-07 efficiency (.552 TS%, .513 eFG%, and .390 3P%).
-Balkman can be sort of the group’s (smaller, more perimeter oriented but maybe better) Steven Hunter if last season was a glitch and he builds on his rookie year.
-If Randolph isn’t traded I suppose Curry’s not going to be in shape for 40 mpg, so if Chandler and Balkman aren’t sufficient to fill out the frontcourt rotation he’s going to have to play some minutes and replace Curry’s scoring at a much less efficient clip. (I don’t expect that D’Antoni is going to come into camp envisioning Randolph as a benchwarmer, but I really wish he would.)

Assuming a slight increase if D’Antoni’s going to go up-tempo and install a more efficient offense than just about any of these guys have played in, my rotation would look something like this in terms of pts/36

Count Duhon for 12-13 pts/36 and he’s sort of the Knicks’ Jim Jackson in terms of scoring.
If Marbury’s around I don’t think his scoring is NEEDED, but he could replace/ complement Nate or Crawford in the rotation easily.

There’s a chance that something attractive becomes available for Marbury via trade mid-season. If that’s going to be a (good) big salary guy (Yao, T-Mac, Redd, Melo, Odom seem most likely) the Knicks are likely going to have to give up more than Steph (say Lee and/or Danilo and maybe more depending on which guy they’re trading for) and in some cases decide whether the guy they’re getting is worth giving up the cap flexibility.

I’m a bit skeptical that the Kings would give up 3/5 of their frontcourt and a likely lottery pick for cap flexibility in the prelude to the highly anticipated 2010 offseason when they’ve already got cap space coming. Once they’ve traded those guys they’re in full blown rebuilding mode (unless Jason Thompson and Spencer Hawes are a solid frontcourt) and their lottery position likely improves. If the Knicks are not interested in actually acquiring Thomas, SAR, and/or Miller they’re basically paying $54 million for a lottery pick (their salaries plus luxury tax). Maybe Walsh sticks Dolan with that bill for a good shot at a top 3 pick, but does Sacto give up a good chance at a top 3 pick or just wait 1 season for those three contracts to expire? The Maloofs aren’t exactly frugal.

The one deal I see as making sense is Marbury to Cleveland for Eric Snow’s contract and Wally Szczerbiak (who there would likely have to be a wink-wink understanding that the Knicks would buy out), and Cleveland’s 2009 1st (assuming they still have one, if not than a future 1st). The Cavs get a piece in the backcourt without giving up anything off their roster if Wally resigns with them, the Knicks take on no extra years of salary, and get a pick. Or maybe Steph for Snow’s contract, Damon Jones, and Anderson Varejao if Cleveland intends to move him. I don’t know if Cleveland has any interest in Marbury, or at least enough to sacrifice a future 1st or Anderson… While there’s definitely a good chance he bounces back in a contract year, the evidence points to his game having declined.

I’m sure there are some other deals out there that would make sense. But if the Knicks do, in fact, intend to cut Marbury before the season even starts, I think it’s as much to send a message and change the culture as anything.

Marbury’s talent has never really been an issue — its all the other things that make him cancerous to a team. Marbury’s first game as a Knick was an important omen — we were all sick of Charlie Ward et al. and getting Marbury was seen in NY at first as a huge coup. I was at the Garden for Marbury’s first game as a Knick — and we promptly got blown out by I think 40 points. Was probably the worst game Ive ever attended at the Garden. If you believe in omens…that was pretty depressing.

Stephon obviously has been a huge failure in NY and its time to cut bait. Duhon helps make the transition, its not about comparing apples and oranges.

What I dont understand though is why would we buy out his last year? wouldnt we try to use his expiring contract to trade him for a draft pick or two? whats the point of buying him out? do we need the roster spot that badly? I could understand using him as a sign and trade for Monta Ellis (Golden State might want his expiring contract).

What is the harm of letting Marbury start the season, show the NBA he can still play and then trade his contract? Seems the most logical approach. Marbury is playing for a new contract from somewhere this year and should be motivated. Could be a win-win for both Marbury and the Knicks. As such Marbury might (at least publicly) accept a backup role because he needs to be on his best behavior.

Of course, Marbury has consistently defied logic in his public behavior so who knows what he is thinking, but at least thats a logical approach. I dont understand what a buyout would accomplish, his salary is expiring after this year and is a valuable trade tool.

Thanks for the apology Ted, it was unnecessary, but classy and appreciated. All these years of losing has made us all a bit testy from time to time.

I am certainly not a big fan of Steph and will be glad to soon be rid of his baggage. I just want the new management to do it in a way that benefits the team the most in the long run. There have been so many lopsided trades in this league over the years. I would like to see us on the long end of one for a change and Steph’s contract at least presents a glimmer of hope. In terms of D’Antoni having already coached Steph, there is no indication in any of the articles I read from 2004 re: the trade that indicae that D’Antoni had any problem with Steph. On the contrary, he actually praised Steph and said it was strictly a business decision to create more flexibility and cap room, which it did.

I agree with your point about having a lot of scorers that are inefficient. My fear is that teams are going to quickly figure out how to slow down D’Antoni’s offense because 1) we don’t have anybody close to a Steve Nash to run it (his ability to create his own shot, includnig 3’s, is a very big part of his game) and 2) not having an Amare Stoudemire to both run the floor and execute in the pick and roll. Eddy and Zach are giong to slow down the offense, yet they have to play because there’s nobody else at the F-C position, particularly against teams that have stud big men. Jamal and Q are very inefficient as well and while the 7-second offense will help, they will be overmatched at their respective position on many nights. Lee and Balk will get their share of points, but they will also disappear for stretches, especially in a halfcourt game. Since we are defensively-challenged, to say the least, the run and gun offense is going to be hampered by the other team shooting a high percentage and having the extra time to set up on D.

Because of these issues, Steph can still have a valuable role in the short run and help the team get off to a good start. I think that without him, this team will be more likely get off to a terrible start. If he means a few more wins early on (in a reduced role) then he makes himself and guys like Jamal, Zach and Eddy more attractive in the trade market.

While in the long run these problems will be solved by getting players that are better at running the system, for this year, at least some of the focus should be on showcasing the albatrosses.

I like your Steph to Cleveland idea and they could probably use him if he is healthy. I doubt they would go for it unless he plays well and within the team concept.

this isn’t true, although it depends how much of his recent play was his injury and how much was just him getting old. either way, he had no ability left to elevate last year, which made his drives pretty easy to snuff.

I don’t see a real argument for keeping him, honestly, but I’ll leave it to Walsh and D’Antoni. people arguing that we can possibly trade him don’t seem to understand that a) he’s toxic and no one wants him anywhere near their real players and b) he makes so much that matching his salary with worthless players is almost impossible.

“As such Marbury might (at least publicly) accept a backup role because he needs to be on his best behavior.”

I agree that Marbury will on his best behavior. It will be kind of like when Philly cut ties with Terrell Owens and he signed with Dallas. TO’s reputation was in the toilet (he was perceived as a lockerroom cancer), and he knew that if he acted up in D, Parcell’s would have no trouble giving him the boot as well. He needed a stage to rehab his rep.

Marbs is in the same boat. If the Knicks cut him, he won’t have an opportunity to show he is worthy of another contract and that he knows how to be a team player. Regardless whether its with the Knicks or some other team.

Regarding all the posts saying the Knicks are paying too much for Duhon: who cares? It’s Dolan’s money. Additionally, Duhon could be a huge bargain for the MLE if he’s given starter minutes.

TDM, I fail to see much relevance in your citing Terrell Owens’ situation as comparable to Marbury’s. Sure, they both managed to garner reputations as soulless, egotistical, demonic presences in the locker room, however that is about where your line of thought hits its limit. At no point during Owens’ career did he fail to produce or benefit his team on the field. In fact, Owens’ teams for the most part generally managed to perform fairly well, thanks to or in spite of his play. The same cannot be said for Starbury. For years now, it’s been common knowledge that he is not only the social antichrist, but also not quite skilled enough on the court anymore. Who cares if he acts better? If he can’t dribble without bouncing it off his foot and blaming someone else, he has no value to the team as a player or trade pawn…aside from that exp contract bit.

re: Marbury, count me with the people who say that a trade is feasible. Golden State is so far under the cap they could just send back Al Harrington (and a draft pick, or a pair of second-rounders – whatever). Or Milwaukee could do a straight up deal for Michael Redd, just to get the remaining THREE years of his contract off the books. Then we turn around and trade Redd to anyone, like Golden State for Harrington and Anthony Randolph, or a pick. Just throwing out ideas — but I expect there will be options. If the best we can do is get a 2nd round pick for spending an extra $40 million next year (with tax) then we can turn him loose just as easily in February, as now.

It’s almost certainly better to wait — all the buyout talk has chilled the market, as someone else pointed out. But a healthy Marbury will have plenty of value to a good team, as long as they’re not paying him like a star.

I think Walsh is in the best position to know whether Marbury has any trade value (now or later). He also knows how much. I am convinced both he and Dantoni want Marbury out for all the intangible reasons being discussed. So to keep him around (even for half a season) he would not only have to have some value, he would have to have enough value to make taking the chance of keeping him around worth the trouble. I don’t think simply saying “we could get something for him” or “he could produce wins” is enough of an incentive when he’s clearly not in the long term plans and is viewed negatively.

Your trade has GS taking on huge salaries (Crawford & Curry) for three more years — they won’t do that; they can use the cap space to sign some of the FAs who come on the market in 2009 and 2010.

I do think they might be tempted to use Marbury as a one-year filler, to try and stay competitive this season. If the deal is for Harrington alone, it only costs GS about $4 million total, since Harrington would be off their books next year. Meanwhile, this summer they’d still be $10 million under the cap, to try and sign someone like Maggette (they can go over the cap to re-sign Ellis & Biedrins). At this point they still have other options, like swinging a trade for Hinrich, but Harrington-for-Marbury is pretty low-risk for them.

btw, I’ve seen a lot of people say we might swing a sign-and-trade for Monta Ellis — remember, Golden State can match any offer and they are $24 million under the cap! So, I don’t think they’re trading him unless someone offers a Dwyane Wade-level superstar.

“he would not only have to have some value, he would have to have enough value to make taking the chance of keeping him around worth the trouble.”

I know many others disagree, but I don’t think “intangibles” or “causing trouble” are real issues — ever, for any team. If Marbury really wants to play drama queen in a contract year, he’ll just be benched or sent home. No worries. The only way cutting him outright would have even a theoretical benefit is if we needed the roster spot for a player who might actually play.

In the past with Marbury, the trouble had been that while he acting like something a few steps beyond drama queen, he was still playing. Actually, I believe that at one point he was officially sent home and playing for the team at the same time. Hopefully the lack of the smirking lemur who is Isiah Thomas will eliminate this sort of nonsense. Then again, I wouldn’t put it past him to finagle his fingers into this team from his position as 3rd Assistant Congolese scout. Paranoia

What do you say we try getting Roy Tarpley reinstated? I smell a championship…

Caleb,look @ the trade again,GS needs to replace Davis’20+pts.,particularly at the end of the Nelson era.There are no 20 pt.scorers cheaper than Crawford, Redd, for example is $15+mil.Alan Hahn of Newsday suggested some NBA GM’s think an Ellis/Crawford duo would be formidable. Curry is only 2 years and you’re right, the “cost” of GS replacing the 20 pts. is Eddy,whose offense might fit GS and as I noted,Nelson might not even notice Big E doesn’t play D. I think Mullin might actually balk at giving up so much youth,however,I’m speculating he’s under enormous pressure to win now & and Crawford is actually his cheapest alternative.Imagine the K’s under the cap in ’09,nice thought!! Go Donny!!

“I don’t think “intangibles” or “causing trouble” are real issues — ever, for any team. If Marbury really wants to play drama queen in a contract year, he’ll just be benched or sent home. No worries.”

Caleb– I know you live in Atlanta, but surely you have access via the internet to the New York media. If Marbury is at home sulking, the hordes of media focus on just one thing: Marbury sulking. It gets worse when the team doesn’t win, which it won’t be doing much of next year anyway. I would imagine it gets horribly frustrating, as we saw David “please, get me out of here lord” Lee try to keep his best game face on while the walls were crumbling around him.

NY is a very bad place for toxic public relationships.

If we want to sign Lee, or attract free agents in the future, NY needs to make itself appear functional again. Hiring Donnie and D’Antoni is a great move in that direction, but if the top story of the 2008-2009 season is Marbury’s anti-team antics (as it was in both 2005-06 and 2007-08) then we may as well still have Isiah running the show.

Z, what you’re saying is true, but if it’s bad like that again they can send him home — the players (most of them) are professionals and if other things are going well, they don’t care what the papers write. It’s the losing, and losing badly, that creates the bad feeling — not the other way around.

In Marbury’s case, in the absolute worst-case scenario, he’s gone in a few months — February — and everyone knows it. David Lee isn’t going to ask out, because Marbury is causing bad vibes. (not to mention, they’re actually friends, supposedly — I know I saw a pic of DL as a pallbearer at the funeral of Marbs’ dad, the only Knick player in action that day)

Even if you assume that GS doesn’t want to hold on to Ellis (a big assumption), I don’t see them having any desire for Curry. I mean, in ’95, Nellie ran the offense through Anthony Mason when Ewing was in his prime, fer chrissakes. Their only Center, Biedrins gets barely 30 mpg. You think Nellie’s going to go to a low-post centric offense now? Esp. after seeing how Curry produces when he’s not the first option.

And why would they pony up for Crawford when they can simply re-sign Kelenna Azubuike/Mickael Pietrus (or give Belinelli more pt) and get pretty much the same production (so-so 3fg%, bad D, streaky scoring).
As far as the Redd/Crawford comparison goes, even at 6 million fewer dollars, there’s no way you can compare Redd to Crawford (and I loves me some Jamal).

So yes – I’m sure GS will miss Davis, but unless Walsh can really snooker his old buddy Chris Mullin, there’s no way I can see your deal happening. It’s waaaaay too lopsided in NY’s favor.

If you offered Crawford for Harrington straight up, that’s something that might be considered reasonable by both sides. GS is ready to dump Harrington and he’s an expiring contract. Crawford takes Davis’ slot at PG.

But honestly, My hope is that The Don is chained to his desk in front of the ESPN trade machine, chain-smoking Pall Mall unfiltereds, downing shots of espresso and calling every GM in the league to peddle Randolph. Everything else is secondary. Selah

Well it sure is a great thing that Lee and Marbury are such great friends. I’m now sure that when they try to trade off Lee they can use this camaraderie as a selling point for a package deal…maybe they could land Marko Jaric, Casey Jacobsen, and the rights to William Avery’s firstborn for such a tremendous duo.

I really could care less about that relationship or their great friendship. Seems to be a very transparent farce of no concern.

“It’s the losing, and losing badly, that creates the bad feeling — not the other way around.”

In case you haven’t noticed the roster, this year’s Knicks team is going to be doing a lot of losing.

I think that the “just send him home” theory works in some cases, but in this one it is an over-simplification of what is the biggest issue facing the team this season: healing the wounds and getting back on track. The Knicks will lose, but it can be productive losing (growing a positive culture through playing hard and on-court improvement) or it can be counter-productive losing (fights in the shower, everybody staying out late, uninspired play, having to answer the question “where’s Steph today?” three times a day by predisposed beat writers).

If (when) the Knicks start losing a lot of games, and Marbury is sent home, that will make the losing much much worse for everybody involved.

It’s like the difference between a separation and a divorce. A divorce is final– the door is closed and everybody moves on. When a couple separates it often becomes even more stressful, both for the actual couple as well as for everybody around them.

I don’t think the Knicks should necessarily buy out Marbury, and I do think that his expiring contract has value; however, If the circus of the last three seasons continues into this season then I think that could potentially hurt the team’s long term goals more than whatever we could get for his expiring deal in February would help.

Why trade Randolph? He scores,rebounds,and plays with passion. Curry should go – he only gives you points. Trade Curry for a shot blocking center and wer’e good to go. Any suggestions who that shot blocker might be?

“On the contrary, he actually praised Steph and said it was strictly a business decision to create more flexibility and cap room, which it did.”

I guess it was Bryan Colangelo’s decision not D’Antoni’s anyway, but the cap space was used to sign his replacement at PG. D’Antoni seems like a class act who’s not going to bad mouth a former player, but Phoenix decided Marbury was not the best PG for their team and it seems painfully obvious that they were right. Duhon is not Nash, but the Knicks aren’t the Suns.

“Because of these issues, Steph can still have a valuable role in the short run and help the team get off to a good start.”

Steph hasn’t done much to help the Knicks win over the last three seasons, maybe he’s motivated playing for a contract but maybe he’s just waiting till he can cash his last check and go play in Italy (or whatever his new plan is).

There are a few reasons I disagree with your “the Knicks offense will struggle without Marbury” sentiments.
-First, D’Antoni preferred to play strong, fast wings in the frontcourt than slow bigs in Phoenix. I don’t see Randolph and Curry playing together when Chandler and Balkman seem like decent fits as poorman’s Marion/ Diaw types (maybe Danilo too, but I think he’ll have to hit the weight-room before playing PF in the NBA), but maybe he buys the Randolph/Curry twin tower garbage…
-Second, I don’t think an NBA offense is about “creating your own shots.” I think it’s about the offense creating shots. On the playground you have to create shots for yourself or directly create shots for teammates (assists), at the NBA level you’re playing 82 games a year with your teammates plus training camp and preseason. You move the ball, you move yourselves, you set picks, and something like 50-75% of the guys are capable of “creating” a shot for themselves at any moment it’s just a matter of how good that shot is. Everyone wants to focus on Kobe’s ability to “create his own shot” which is certainly one of the things that sets him apart, but last season he played in a well run offense where almost everyone was a superior passer.
-I don’t know if D’Antoni is intent on running. He could put out a lineup of, say, Nate, Jamal, Danilo, Chandler, and Lee and run, but the Suns were actually only the 4th fastest team in the NBA last season (maybe because of Shaq?).
-As far as the defense… it doesn’t seem to be a priority, but Balkman, Duhon, and Chandler can potentially brings 3 above-average defenders to the rotation. The example I like is that Washington was 22nd in defensive efficiency and 11th in offensive efficiency last season and the 5th seed in the East last season.
-Finally, I think that adding a couple of guys (Duhon and Danilo) with some basketball IQ will help on both sides of the ball.

Caleb,

I know you’re extremely anti-intangibles, but one example of what’s not captured in most individual players’ stats: basketball IQ. A PG can look like a stud statistically by scoring a lot of points and running up his assist totals by only giving up the ball to teammates in a position to score. But is this necessarily what’s best for the offense? Maybe, in an extreme case, he passes to 30 guys who shoot but only 10 make it. He gets 10 apg and looks like an All-Star but the offense he’s playing in mysteriously blows. He also scores 20 pts/36 on a respectable .530 TS% but with some functional basketball IQ (knowing the game and having the skill/will to put that knowledge to work) he could score 16 pts/36 with a TS% of .575 and the team would convert a higher % of the shots he gives up…

This is captured in team stats, but not many individual stats (certainly not PER for example). I think something like Roland Rating does a lot to capture this, but I just don’t know if basketball stats are so advanced at this point that we can claim they capture everything.

If Marbury’s attitude or Isiah’s animal house atmosphere is hurting the team maybe it shows up in the individual players’ stats and you can rightfully blame them for their performance, but the causation may not always be clear.

“Why trade Randolph? He scores,rebounds,and plays with passion.”

When did Randolph play with passion?

Why trade him? Because his career true shooting percentage is only slightly higher than Jamal Crawford’s (.518 vs. .513). He’s a PF who scores very inefficiently even for a guard.

“he would not only have to have some value, he would have to have enough value to make taking the chance of keeping him around worth the trouble.”
I know many others disagree, but I don’t think “intangibles” or “causing trouble” are real issues — ever, for any team. If Marbury really wants to play drama queen in a contract year, he’ll just be benched or sent home. No worries. The only way cutting him outright would have even a theoretical benefit is if we needed the roster spot for a player who might actually play.

Basically you are saying that the successful managements in virtually every professional sport on earth are crazy to trade away these poisonous personalities for almost nothing and/or let them walk away the way they do.

I believe you are wildly understimating what these kinds of distractions do to a team and how they take away from more productive use of management’s time and energy when they have to deal with the BS (even if temporarily).

If even half of what we hear about his unpopularity with the team is true, the first day he shows up all the air will immediately come out of the “fresh start” balloon. The press, players, etc… will immediately be talking about how nothing has really changed, the organization is making an error, things still suck etc…

It’s rarely as simple as dumping the player as soon as he gets out of line.

I think you hit the nail on the head in your comments about stats and intangibles. I’m not a basketball stats expert, but I’ve been working with stats for decades analyzing another sport.

There tends to be two types of people. Those that are very numbers oriented and those that don’t like numbers much at all (often because they either lack the apptitude for complex numbers or have superior observational powers and intuition).

IMHO, the truth lies somewhere in between.

The numbers can sometimes measure things better than the eye can observe, but sometimes you can observe and understand things that the numbers don’t measure well.

IMO, stats are a required tool in the analysis of any game, player, sport, but they do not always provide the “way, light, truth, or answer” because the real world is very complex.

i think the thing about marbury is that if we attempt to move him for a pick, most teams aren’t gonna have the cap space to absorb his contract for this season without sending us some poopoo contracts in return. i definitely think we should just buy his ass out and send him home, then take the 20 mil off the books at the end of this year.

if we move randolph, i think we’ll be set – your rotation is then curry, lee, chandler, balkman, gallinari, crawford, duhon, nate. all get decent burn and can improve. we won’t win a ton of games, but i would imagine a sense of progress would be made, and we can maybe deal craw or curry and the corpse of big snacks next year.

I think what Caleb is arguing (in part) is that you can’t buy him out AND send him home. If you own his contract you can send him home for the year. If you buy him out he can take his ass to Phili, Boston, Miami, Indiana, Orlando, etc… for the league minimum and, playing with his next contract in mind, can take out his aggression on the New York Knicks and make them look really bad in the process.

Basically, I see both sides of the coin in this issue and Walsh knows better than I, so I’ll defer to him. If I had to choose between watching the Knicks play with Marbury or watching them play with Randolph for a full 2008-09 season, I’d definitely choose the Marbury Knicks.

Ideally they are both gone within the next few months, but if just one of them is gone, the Knicks won’t be any worse for it.

As far as I’m concerned Stephon Marbury’s immediate Knicks future comes down to one issue – whether Donnie is willing to trade his expiring contract.

If Donnie is willing to trade Stephon then the Knicks shouldn’t buy him out. They should keep him around and see what offers rear their heads. The next question is do you keep him on active roster or send him home? I’d try and use his talent. Give it a whirl and see what you get. If it doesn’t work then send him home. I think D’Antoni can work with Steph and get some quality (not his previous all-star levels but starter quality) out of him.

If Donnie is unwilling to trade Stephon then there’s no point in keeping him around. Just buy him out this week and move on. Let Duhon and Nate run the point.

_____________________________________________________

Main reason Donnie might be unwilling to trade is 2010 and any free agency hopes he has …. which have clearly been indicated by his words and more importantly his Chris Duhon signing (only 2 year contract).

A second point worth bearing in mind over Stephon’s expiring contract and his trade value is that he’s unlikely to bring a top tier player back. Most teams that give up a star for an expiring contract also like to gain a top youngster (Al Jefferson for KG). The Knicks don’t have that youngster with star potential. They don’t even have that youngster who has that “maybe” star potential like a Randy Foye. Which brings us to Gallinari who’s the only possible player for that but he’s unlikely to prove that in the first 40 (or less) games of his career on a dysfunctional team while adapting to a whole new country and style of basketball in the limelight of NYC. This becomes more important when you consider several teams like Portland and Seattle have expiring contracts plus an assortment of youngsters to outbid New York if that top player were to become available. So Stephon is unlikely to bring a top tier player back but his expiring contract could net a lower star like a borderline all-star – Jason Richardson or a Gasol type for example – which brings us to our next question ….. Is Donnie willing to give up the cap space he wants in 2010 for a borderline star or 2nd/3rd option on a contender?

Frankly I think the answer is no and I believe the only way Donnie will trade Stephon’s expiring contract is for a top tier star which I don’t believe will happen. I don’t think Donnie will be willing to throw away the opportunity of potentially getting LeBron/Bosh/Wade or someone else in 2010 for a borderline All-Star. He’ll want to wait and slowly reconstruct the team for the next run rather than making a short term move.

So ….. Donnie might as well cut Stephon and be done with it. Cut out a potential problem and a player who regardless of what happens next has no future with the Knicks. Let Nate and Duhon run the point.

“If you buy him out he can take his ass to Phili, Boston, Miami, Indiana, Orlando, etc… for the league minimum and, playing with his next contract in mind, can take out his aggression on the New York Knicks and make them look really bad in the process.”

I don’t think he’s too much more capable of this than Steve Francis was (impressive season he just had, huh?), and if you’re talking about head to head against NY, I think playing against Steph might be the most motivated we see NY all next season.

Let’s see…. Team A wins 33 games with Player X as starting point guard. The following year, with Player X missing 58 games, Team A wins just 23. Which is more likely to cause a 10-game improvement the next year?
a) Player A makes a comeback
b) Player B is cut and misses all 82 games

hmmmmm….

How about people nominate examples of “addition by subtraction.” If anyone is interested, I’ll write a post to break them down – maybe I can be convinced. You can take this as an offer or a threat :)

“Intangibles” deserve a post of their own, but here are a few last (maybe) thoughts on Marbury:

– Does anyone think Quentin Richardson shot 35% and couldn’t guard anyone because he was distracted by Marbs? Q, David Lee, Jamal Crawford, Eddy Curry – every key Knicks player has had his best career season playing next to Marbury as the starting point. Not that he was responsible for their success, but it doesn’t suggest he makes others worse just by existing.

…like Marbs for Brad Miller & Kenny Thomas. If you don’t think Walsh would take on $43 million just to get an extra draft pick next year, you’re probably right – but he might not have to. For example, the Kings could substitute Mikki Moore and Francisco Garcia for Thomas; their deals are done this season so we’re only on the hook for $12 million next year (doubled for luxury tax). Or, we could send Marbs to a team under the cap, like Golden State – my Harrington trade would only cost the Knicks $8 million next year (doubled). No one thinks Walsh will get a star in exchange for Marbury, but getting a draft pick is a reasonable goal. The cost is high, but this team desperately needs to round up as many assets as possible.

– “If even half of what we hear about his unpopularity with the team is true, the first day he shows up all the air will immediately come out of the “fresh start” balloon. The press, players, etc… will immediately be talking about how nothing has really changed, the organization is making an error, things still suck etc…”

Whether Marbury is here or not, the honeymoon won’t last past the first three-game losing streak. By December, there will be at least a dozen articles saying the rebuilding project is in a state of collapse. Write it down! That doesn’t mean it will be true….

I do live in Atlanta, but I was in NYC and surrounding areas for more than 25 years and I still read the New York papers…

I like the Duhon deal. I like that it’s only two years. He’s a legit pass-first point with a rep for having a nice shot.
The move is cap healthy for 2010.
And now with Marbury, they either have options at point during the season, or they can move Marbury or cut him.
I suspect they will hold him because their options at point would be limited.

Caleb, the first part of your post is a little misleading. While the Knicks did in fact suck more this past year than when Marbury was leading the show the year before, you cannot attribute all of the added losses to his absence. For example, the addition of Z-bo the Congolese Chief may have played some part in the team’s further downfall, not to mention the TREMENDOUS effect had by Fred Jones…sure. Also, perhaps it was the nature of Marbury’s absence itself–the drama, the sideshow, the utter fuckuppery–that encouraged the losing, not so much the fact that he was not contributing on court.

“Bottom line on Steph is he has worn out his welcome everywhere he has ever been. Why is that? Because he’s a me-first player? Because he’s a poor teammate? Maybe so. More likely, it’s simply because he’s a dumbass. A PG is supposed to provide floor leadership, settle things down when runs happen, ensure a good trip when you need it most. When your PG is a flat out dumbass, it’s very hard for him to do any of those things.”

It’s really a tragic story. I’ll never forget the Phoenix game when his dad died. Isiah threw him under the bus. He did have one terrible situation after another. He would have been better off if they had just kept Kurt Thomas and Keith Van Horne.

However, he never helped himself. His interviews last summer, including the Bruce Beck debacle (which would have been hilarious if the guy played anywhere else, btw) gave fans insight into his cognitive abilities or lack there-of. Additionally, he was trying to express a new found affability but it belied a lot of pain and anger. I remember one game where Channing Frye patted him on the head during a TO and Marbury absolutely froze him with an evil eye type look. This is the true Steph. No ability to think, arrogant, and outright mean to team mates.

If another team wants cap space and is offering an all star who can be a player that’s worth 20 million for a few seasons then we should trade him and have our summer of 2010 right now. Otherwise, please, get rid of the mean bully kid. He’s gonna kill our fresh start.

I don’t. Off the top of my head, in order of importance, I think the worse record was mainly due to:

– Lee and Balkman’s minutes being cut (indirectly, the Randolph effect)
– Q getting dramatically worse
– Marbury missing time that was taken by Collins and Jones

Maybe 2 or 3 games due to giving up in the last part of the season — poor effort, pseudo-injuries and extra playing time for the young guys.

Whether or not he plays in 2008-2009 — doesn’t matter, for this rebuilding team. I just don’t want to give away a player for nothing, when we might get something in return.

Others have suggested that the remaining players will play better if Marbury is gone. That strikes me as silly — there’s no real evidence that his being in the lineup makes players better or worse, much less that he distracts them while sitting under his towel.

Let’s see…. Team A wins 33 games with Player X as starting point guard. The following year, with Player X missing 58 games, Team A wins just 23. Which is more likely to cause a 10-game improvement the next year?
a) Player A makes a comeback
b) Player B is cut and misses all 82 games

hmmmmm….

How about people nominate examples of “addition by subtraction.” If anyone is interested, I’ll write a post to break them down – maybe I can be convinced. You can take this as an offer or a threat :)

Hmmmm I wonder how the 01/02 Nets 04/05 Suns would affect such a calculation. :-)

“Others have suggested that the remaining players will play better if Marbury is gone. That strikes me as silly — there’s no real evidence that his being in the lineup makes players better or worse, much less that he distracts them while sitting under his towel.”

Caleb,
Haven’t you ever worked with someone that you hate? Workplace environment is huge. I admit, Isiah was a huge culprit there because he yoyo-ed Marbury between outcast and starting pg. Still, players play better when someone isn’t looking over their shoulder. We need loose happy players.

I think the Knicks will overpay for any sort of asset they can use. My trades get an extra #1 pick at the cost of 20Mil. Seems extreme, but the Knicks have deep pockets. Any extra #1 can be packaged to help get rid of Zach, without losing Lee. Right now, the Knicks will have no #1 in 2010, because Utah owns it

“Hmmmm I wonder how the 01/02 Nets 04/05 Suns would affect such a calculation. :-) ”

We have our first two nominees! It’s like Groundhog Day, isn’t it?

“Can I add bad coaching to the list?”

Yes, that’s responsible for all three items. I could give IT a pass for playing Q the first month or so; given the previous season it was reasonable to think he was just in a slump. But it was bad coaching which kept him on the floor the next four months.

I think one possible reason why Isiah kept Q out there so long is that with each passing shithouse performance by Q, he thought “hmm, he must be one more closer to a breakout.” However, as this never exactly happened, the trend kept perpetuating itself, with Q’s awful play causing Isiah to continue to play him in hopes of a better tomorow…hey, it’s a theory.

Bad coaching does not come close to what Isiah did. It seems every one of his choices was the wrong way to go. SOme unforseen but most just terrible judgment.

I read reports that he refused to teach defense, and that he often gave the team days off rather than working on defensive drills.

He failed to have the team ready to play.

He refused to put his best defensive players on the court.

He stayed with struggling players.

He completley undermined his own authority.

He never gained the resect of players like Randolph and Q last season. Even the consumate pro, Malik Rose, checked out on IT.

He thrust a less than 100% Collins into a starting role that he could not have handled if healthy. Then he had to slink back to Steph when the Collins experiment failed.

He brought in Fred Jones as a swing when he should have been looking for a third point.

He wasted a second round draft pick on a player that he should have known could not have made the team. And if he had to clear a roster space to keep the player, then why not waive Jones, Morris, or James to keep the player you traded for? Hell, James played in 2 games the past year. He could have at least tried to get a medical exemption and have James sit for the year, if they did not want to release him. But at this point, what difference does it make to keep James? You have to pay him anyway, why not just pay him and get him out of here? He is only slightly more productive on the bench than he is off the team. Actually, I think he is less productive on the team because he is eating-pun intended-a roster spot that some other player, a somewhat effective player like, I dont know, Fredric Wiess or jon abbey, could use. I’m not saying D-Nice would have been a difference maker, but cutting James would have sent a messege that sloth and toper will not be tolerated.

Everything Isiah did outside of the draft was an unmitigated disaster last year. It was so bad you would think Mike Brown and FEMA were running the show.

Rider was a high lottery pick, an all rookie, a highly regarded talent. His personality was so bad that Minnesota dumped him [“In return for Rider, the T-Wolves received Bill Curley, James Robinson and a conditional first round draft pick in 1997 or 1998 which apparently wasn’t used” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isaiah_Rider)]

The following year the TWolves won 14 more game. The year after that they won five more.

“He wasted a second round draft pick on a player that he should have known could not have made the team.”

I think you are referring to Demetris Nichols. Someone was asking about him on the previous board. He’s on the Bulls Summer League team. He actually played fairly well last year on the Knicks summer league, but you are correct, IT had better ways of spending a second round pick than taking a project SF.

I know the Knicks picked up Duhon, but I found it interesting that the Grizzlies left Kyle Lowry off of its summer league team. However, they put Conley, Crittendon, Mayo and a pg from Iona on the team.

The problem with the Nichols pick is that IT traded away this year’s 2nd rounder to get it.

There was talk of a pre-arranged deal to send Nichols to Europe for the year, but it fell apart when Nichols changed agents. Once he refused to go to Europe (which would have kept him out of roster calculations) — there was no roster space for him, short of cutting Jerome James, which IT obviously was not prepared to do. So, we basically gave away the #35 pick in this year’s draft. Clips took DeAndre Jordan in that spot.

Not the highest-stakes thing in the world, and you could argue that Nichols double-crossed us, but it basically looks like incompetence.

You can’t read too much into that — very few players entering their 3rd year, will play summer league. Nate Robinson was the exception. I don’t know why this tradition exists… I guess most teams want a longer look at their new players, and think it would be insulting to have the veterans sit on the bench…

“He wasted a second round draft pick on a player that he should have known could not have made the team.”
I think you are referring to Demetris Nichols. Someone was asking about him on the previous board. He’s on the Bulls Summer League team. He actually played fairly well last year on the Knicks summer league, but you are correct, IT had better ways of spending a second round pick than taking a project SF.

To be clear, let me say this: D-Nice did not make the team for a lack of ability, but because the roster was full. I really liked what D-nice showned in the summer, and he had great draft reports. I wasnt knocking the player, rather the coach/GM.

A big difference between the Knicks last season and the T-Wolves/Nets/Suns previously is that the Knicks had only Mardy Collins at PG on their roster, while the Terrell Brandon/Jason Kidd/and Steve Nash. To date, Duhon has not been as good as Brandon let alone Kidd or Nash, so if Marbury’s gone we’ll have to see how it works out this time.

re: #3 Blazers and #4 JR Rider

The Blazers may be a good example… Randolph looked good in 06-07 according to most stats (22.8 PER, .147 WP48, and +8.1 Roland Rating). The Blazers also experienced natural growth from their young players, Aldridge might be most relevant since he basically replaced Zach.

Rider left the Wolves after KG’s rookie year and before Steph’s… KG went from the 4th spot in the Wolves’ rotation to the 2nd and Marbury came into the 3rd. They added talent as well as subtracting it, which I guess is usually the case and really complicates any analysis of the issue.

To be clear, let me say this: D-Nice did not make the team for a lack of ability, but because the roster was full. I really liked what D-nice showned in the summer, and he had great draft reports. I wasnt knocking the player, rather the coach/GM.

To be even clearer, Thomas only traded for Nichols because he agreed to play in Europe for a year (so the Knicks wouldn’t have to put him on the roster), then promptly fired his agent and reneged on the deal.

So yeah, there’s a certain amount of “a GM has to be prepared for a player not telling him the truth,” but really, what’s a guy supposed to do when a player just outright lies to him?

To be clear, let me say this: D-Nice did not make the team for a lack of ability, but because the roster was full. I really liked what D-nice showned in the summer, and he had great draft reports. I wasnt knocking the player, rather the coach/GM.

To be even clearer, Thomas only traded for Nichols because he agreed to play in Europe for a year (so the Knicks wouldn’t have to put him on the roster), then promptly fired his agent and reneged on the deal.
So yeah, there’s a certain amount of “a GM has to be prepared for a player not telling him the truth,” but really, what’s a guy supposed to do when a player just outright lies to him?

To be even more clearer :-)…
Even if D-Nice lied about Europe Thomas had options. He could have tried to trade him for another pick or a player that would have gone to Europe. Thomas could have cut Jones, who was not in the long term plans or trade his expiring contract for a future pick. Thomas could have also moved Morris, who showed us exactly why he went undrafted (yeah I know the real story behind the draft, I’m just bust Morris’ chops). All I’m saying is that Thomas had options. I’m not sure if he explored any of them.

The Knicks thought that MacLeod would be a good fit but he wasn’t. The roster didn’t change much during these three years (Ewing, Oakley, Jax were the cornerstones). They subtracted him and the team reverted back to winning. (yes, Riley is a better coach than MacLeod, but Stu Jackson won with the same team…)

There are, of course, other examples of coach firings that support the addition by subtraction argument. Since this is a Knick site, I thought I’d throw MacLeod out there.

the Sixers had another addition by subtraction this past season. right after they gave Korver away to Utah, they turned around their season.

we’ve talked about this more than once before, Caleb, and you seem like a pretty smart guy, but I really don’t understand how someone can follow the league closely and not understand what seems to me like a pretty obvious fundamental fact. chemistry in the NBA is a fragile thing and there are only so many minutes to go around, sometimes pure subtraction is the answer.

The Spurs didn’t really improve much after they traded Rodman for Will Purdue. They averaged 57.5 wins with Rodman and won 59 without him. But they certainly didn’t hurt themselves trading him for the far inferior Purdue.

Rodman’s antics had simply gotten too much for the sleepy, conservative, backwater town of San Antonio and the Bulls were probably the only takers. I’m not sure if he’d begun wearing a dress off court, but he was the first of the ultra-tatooed, ultra-pierced, openly-alternative players of his generation.

Rodman led the league in rebounding and helped David Robinson dominate the league. But they were willing to let him go, and it certainly didn’t hurt. Rodman won 3 rings in the years after he left, but the Spurs have won with 4.

I’m not sure if example 7 actually counts…as Z says “The Spurs didn’t really improve much after they traded Rodman for Will Purdue.” This topic seems to basically be a summary of what ye olde infallible Bill Simmons dubbed the “Ewing Theory”

Another example of the Ewing theory is the New York Football Giants winning the Superbowl after their All Pro RB retired. (This can actually count double if you include Shockey not being with the team for the playoff run.)

The Falcons were thought by many to be Ewing theory candidates before last season after Mike Vick left the team, but it didn’t work out. Simmons actually mentions the theory quite a lot in his writings and, although he didn’t create the original theory, he certainly did make it popular.

I am a Knicks fan who now lives in Chicago. I’ve watched Chris Duhon for his entire career and am happy with this signing—if only because he was the only option to even play adequate point guard next year without a major financial commitment. If Duhon was the Knicks point guard last year, for instance, I believe they would have won 35 games or more because merely adequate play at that the point guard position, without drama, would have resulted in a more cohesive team. It can’t be understated how difficult it was for anyone to succeed under the Yoke of Isiah and Marbury. I wanted the Knicks to make a run at Duhon the last time he was a free agent, and I think it became an obvious fit when D’Antoni was hired.

Duhon is not as good as his talent and skill set indicate that he could be, however. I always thought that he was about to break out as a starting quality PG because he really looks the part; he plays under control, limits mistakes, distributes well (albeit unspectacularly), can hit the open trey, and plays very good defense. The problem? He lacks offensive creativity. He doesn’t finish well around the rim and is not in the paint often enough.

That creativity might have actually been there, but he did not ever express an inclination to impose his will on the game. Perhaps that is because Heinrich and Gordon were the “stars” of the Chicago backcourt and Duhon was only ever asked to play defense and pass the rock. Also, his shooting percentage is so low because he took many of his shots late in the shot-clock after the rest of a very limited offensive team couldn’t find one. That could definitely improve with a better offensive system that doesn’t go very deep in the shot clock and better post players.

He could improve, but at the very least his defense and affinity for deferring to teammates will make him adequate. In other words, Chris Duhon is going to remind many of Charlie Ward. That may not impress you, but the Knicks could do worse. And you may remember that part of the frustration of watching Ward was the distinct impression that he could have been much better if he was simply more aggressive on offense. Jeff Van Gundy was not the coach to transform someone’s offensive game. I wonder if D’Antoni can give Chris Duhon the offensive mindset and tools that Ward was never given.

D’Antoni is the caveat to any assessment of the Duhon signing. The combination of Mike D’Antoni’s coaching and a consistent 35 minutes a night could really lead to a somewhat dramatic improvement by Duhon. Since Eddy Curry’s departure the Bulls have been a one-on-one jump shooting team with very poor ball movement. Heinrich, Gordon, and Nocioni take far too many contested perimeter shots. Other than Luol Deng hitting baseline jumpers off screens, nobody got shots within an offense. The Bulls never really even did a pick and roll that often because the perimeter guys wouldn’t give up the ball. Duhon, either playing off the ball in the starting lineup or point guard with crappy reserves, never really had a chance to show what he could do running a coherent system with good teammates. The teammates are worse in New York right now, but the system will be much better because of D’Antoni – which makes it idiotic that the Bulls didn’t hire him. If D’Antoni ordered Duhon to drive and shoot more often just to keep defenses honest, and Duhon actually tried it, then we could be looking at a very complete ballplayer and a big-time bargain.

So what we’re really getting, I think, is a Charlie Ward type with a possibility of dramatic improvement. For two years that is a good bet and a good signing by Donnie Walsh.

And as far as I know, Duhon has no problem with Jews. So that’s good, too.

Z, fair point…but I think what Simmons was referring to with the name was the 98-99 playoffs, when Ewing was hurt for about half the run to the finals and all of a sudden the team gelled and played much better than they had during a fairly mediocre shortened season. But yes, I would have to agree that the Knicks have been perfectly horrid since dealing him, though I’m not sure how much of this is attributable to his absence on the team, so much as the financial hell and utter chaos it birthed.
On a side note, generally I find Simmons to be full of shit 95% of the time anyway, but usually a fun read regardless.

Let’s see…. Team A wins 33 games with Player X as starting point guard. The following year, with Player X missing 58 games, Team A wins just 23. Which is more likely to cause a 10-game improvement the next year?
a) Player A makes a comeback
b) Player B is cut and misses all 82 games
hmmmmm….
How about people nominate examples of “addition by subtraction.” If anyone is interested, I’ll write a post to break them down – maybe I can be convinced. You can take this as an offer or a threat :)

Hmmmm I wonder how the 01/02 Nets 04/05 Suns would affect such a calculation. :-)

I agree with Caleb on this one, nice to say that after our differences over Lee…

The Nets traded him for Jason Kidd, one of the best pure point guards in history (meaning, Steph had trade value then and probably still has some under present contract conditions if he plays well). They did not hand the reins to Chris Duhon.

The Suns traded him mainly to create cap room (they made the playoffs the season before and they took the Spurs (eventual NBA champs) to 6 games so he wasn’t exactly a bum there and I have not uncovered any personality issues with teammates from phoenix. They absolutely stunk for the rest of that season, then picked up Steve Nash (what was Cuban thinking?!) and the rest is history.

I think what we all have in common is an initial trust for Walsh and D’Antoni. I can live with whatever decision they make. It is fun to take a position in advance of that, but since both guys seem shrewd and unlikely to make a decision based on superficialities, I can feel good that if they decide to cut bait, they felt strongly about Steph’s postential to disrupt their plans. I hope that the guys on the other side of this argument will feel the same way if they decide to let him hang around to see if they can salvage something out of the situation.

The writing’s been on the wall for months, but it’s still odd to realize he won’t be back. I’be been trying to restrain any premature celebrating of his departure, because I still thought he’d find a way to worm his way back on the roster. But even if the Bulls originally thought they’d put up a fight, they were certainly scared away by a nearly-MLE offer from the Knicks. (Apparently they’ve really clamped down on the wasteful spending: “We’ll overpay you, but for only two years, buddy!”)

Back to Chris Duhon sucking as a Bull and how much I hated it. A lot of it wasn’t really his fault. He was the apple of Scott Skiles’ eye, the type who’d give it his darndest even when overmatched, which was pretty much always. Skiles even used him to guard LeBron James on more than a-plenty of occasions.

But is it Duhon’s fault that he was so often over-used and mis-used? Not really. As purely a backup PG who’d get only 10-12 minutes a night, he’d be fine. He doesn’t turn the ball over, can hassle opposing PGs effectively, and he’ll give you one game a year where he hits a half-dozen three-pointers. Maybe given limited minutes and strict instructions when to shoot (especially instructions to shoot when open…man how I detested that), he’d be especially effective.

But this contract is the second multi-yeared-and-millioned deal he’s received in his career, and it’s the essence of what is wrong with having Chris Duhon on your team: someone, likely in a decision-making position, will look at his skillset and ‘intangibles’ (though that strangely clashed with his off-court habits) and think that since he’s an ‘unselfish’ and ‘smart’ player, that more minutes is a good thing.

It’s not.

Duhon gets praised as a ‘pass-first’ point guard. But he’s not ‘pass first’. He’s ‘ass first’. His most preferred style of play is to play like ass. Then pass, then shoot. Oftentimes never getting to that third one, crippling your offensive flow, and ticking me off.

But no longer…and it’s almost sad. (Wait, I forgot for a second that the Bulls just used the #1 overall selection to take a point guard.) So long, Duh! Despite your absence, consider this space, and apparently at least one Chicago bar (yes, those are my dainty hands in the photo), places where your legacy will remain intact.

I would have to say that nicknaming the former sonics the “Thundercats” is quite possibly one of the few greatest things to happen to the NBA in the past ten year. Think of all the chances for the tie-ins to that classy 80s cartoon..Snarf as a mascot, dance team named after Cheetarah, a rousing cheer of HO from the crowd after TV breaks…Lion-o as GM? Christ, the possibilities are endless. Best of all, when the Thundercats face the Bobcats, there could be some sort of lucrative tie in with a pregame cage match between Thor, god of thunder, and Bob Barker or some other notable Bob. The 2008-09 NBA season, where shit happens. Just wait a few years for the expansion Las Vegas Smurftits

Of all the ones above, the Sixers with AI might be a good example of what the Knicks are doing. They had an aging star in their backcourt who, even though he can still play, wasn’t in their plans and hadn’t been helping their team win. They get rid of him and replace him with a PG who fits better with what they’re trying to do.
Andre Miller is better than Chris Duhon (and probably AI, as well, Owen will point out that Berri predicted the Sixers would improve by replacing AI with Miller by exactly the number of wins they did improve). Maybe if along with replacing Marbury with Duhon the Knicks play within an offense and replace the tremendous number of shots taken last season by tremendously inefficient Randolph and Crawford with more efficient scorers like Curry, Lee, and Danilo they can experience a similar boost from parting ways with their former “franchise player” (playing a little defense wouldn’t hurt either).
That’s all assuming they part ways with Marbury.

re: BullsBlogger

I’m not particularly impressed my the quality of that post/comment/whatever. Not once does the writer reference a statistic to support any point he makes. Duhon is a terrible shooter, yet he shoots respectably well. He’s a terrible passer, yet he also passes respectably. It would also be important to note that in 05-06 and 06-07 he was a significantly better shooter than in 04-05 (his rookie year) or last season.
It’s a bit of a leap to faith to think Duhon will take a step forward and become a quality starting PG, but he’s as solid a back-up PG as you’ll find… 10-12 mpg??? Maybe playing behind Chris Paul.
It’s nice to see the other side of the story, but this analysis is as emotionally charged as if I, as a Knicks fan, were to say Duhon will become the next Steve Nash.

Ted, that post did not call Duhon a terrible shooter. It called him an overly reluctant shooter, which he is. It also did not say that Duhon was that bad a player, just one who has his limitations. Limitations that were ignored by his coach(es) in Chicago.

The shooting I’m not sure about, the overall tone I got was that Duhon is horribly inefficient at everything.

Everything I’ve read is that Skiles disliked Duhon (literally didn’t care for him), and was reluctant to play him. I’ve read several articles citing Skiles refusal to play Duhon more last season when his teammates felt he was the team’s best PG as a major reason for all the “chemistry problems” Chicago had last season.

Duhon has not played as well over his career as Hinrich, so I don’t necessarily agree with the Bulls players.

But Duhon has averaged 25.8 mpg on his career while Hinrich has gotten 35.2. He’s clearly the back-up and has always been Chicago’s 3rd guard at best. This blog is nothing more than an emotional rant, which is fine. I mean it’s this person’s blog and they can rant about whatever they want… I was just pointing out what it was.